The
critical pairing of Jonson and Shakespeare might not always be one of the most
illuminating comparisons in literary history, but it is one of the most
enduring. The
distinctiveness of the Jonson-Shakespeare pairing lies in the often implicit assumption
that these two somehow function as each other’s alternative; that between them
they define a crucial axis of literary possibility – between learning and
imagination, or inspiration and labour. The comparison has often served to
elevate Shakespeare over Jonson, on grounds sometimes less aesthetic than
crudely moral - Jonsonian envy or ethical failure used to highlight Shakespeare’s
generosity or singular virtue. This, in turn, has generated responses which are
sometimes guilty of partisanship or defensiveness.
These tendencies are
still visible today in academic and popular evocations of “Shakespeare and Jonson”.
Yet in other ways the pairing itself might seem archaic. The vastness of the
Shakespeare industry has ensured that the Bard (when not assumed to be beyond
compare) has benefited from a much less restrictive set of comparisons. For
Jonson, the picture is more mixed. He has benefited from attention in areas with
a less obviously Shakespearean relevance, such as the court masque, and unlike
the Oxford Middleton the new Cambridge edition of Jonson is not modelled on a
Shakespearean template. To that extent, he is no longer automatically fated to
a disadvantageously comparative approach. In other ways, though, he is receding
from view. The RSC has not staged a Jonson play for almost a decade, while the
Globe has never mounted a full production of one of his works.
What value, then, is to
be found in reviving the old double act? How, now, can they speak to each
other? What can their conjunction reveal that might otherwise remain obscure? This,
in a year that sees the quatercentenary of the publication of Jonson’s first
folio and of Shakespeare’s death, is what we seek to find out with this special
issue of Shakespeare on “Shakespeare
and Jonson”. We would be happy to consider essays from any approach, although
we would wish them to avoid merely retreading the old pas de deux. Essays might shed light on the early years of their
comparison, or episodes in its history that illuminate it anew. We would be
interested, too, in essays seeking to bring Shakespearean and Jonsonian
thematic or methodological concerns together. What might happen if
Shakespearean concerns are transferred to the Jonsonian corpus, and vice versa?
Examples of possible approaches might include, though are not limited to:
-
Staging and performance history, especially recent
critical developments. Is there any value in considering “Jonson in parts”, for
example?
-
Page and stage: in recent years, Shakespeare
studies has debated the relative merits of approaching the plays as the work of
a man of theatre and/or a ‘literary’ dramatist – how might Jonson appear in the
light of such debates?
-
Religion, Catholicism and Judaism (why, for
example, is Shakespeare’s entirely speculative “Catholicism” wrangled over
while Jonson’s conversions receive comparably little interest?)
-
Nationality and ‘Britishness’;
-
The politics of monarchy, republicanism, or the
monarchical republic;
-
Genders and sexualities
-
Historicism and presentism: do Shakespearean
debates here illuminate the Jonsonian corpus or concerns?
-
Literary heritage, including neoclassical, Greek
and/or medieval influences. The influence of post-medieval, vernacular drama
upon Shakespeare is well-documented, while Jonson is often considered a
consciously neoclassical dramatist. Is it time to revisit this distinction?
-
Literary celebrity. Shakespeare’s reputation as
national bard is firmly cemented, but the recently-discovered account of Ben
Jonson’s walk to Scotland suggests a kind of “royal progress” between London
and Edinburgh. Might this breathe new life into old debates? What might we
learn about early modern ideas of literary fame, its social and political
significance, or the history of the author as celebrity?
Other
ways of staging the conjunction are no doubt possible, and we would be
delighted to consider them. Please send expressions of interest or abstracts for
papers of 6500-7000 words to
james.loxley@ed.ac.uk
and
fionnuala.oneill@soton.ac.uk
by Friday 16
th May 2014.
